Regime Effectiveness, Joint Implementation, and Climate Change Policy

Neorealism “fetishizes” material capabilities in the sense that it embues them with meanings and powers that can only correctly be attributable to human beings. Alexander Wendt Constitutive relations cannot be reduced to the attributes, actions, or interactions of pregiven actors. Power, accordingly, is irreducibly social. In other words, constitutive arguments examine how particular social relations are responsible for producing particular kinds of actors. Michael Barnett and Raymond Duvall The study of power relations lies at the heart of the modern academic discipline of political science. Yet power relations have been oddly understudied in the literature on international political economy and particularly in the literature arising in the North American academy. In large measure this has been because of the manner in which international political economy has developed in attempting to extricate itself from the state-centric North American “canonical” texts in international relations as they have emerged from structural realism and neoliberal institutionalism. In the North American debates scholars were required to struggle to develop the power of market actors and the forces they bring to bear on outcomes in the international economic realm as autonomous actors in international politics. A large measure of the reasons why the study of power relations in international political economy has not heretofore come to develop a sustained discussion of the forms of power relations with which the present work is concerned stems from the focus of the literature in international relations on the direct power effects resulting from the interaction of autonomous actors in an “anarchic” international system.

The focus of this book is on the conditions of entry and exit of economic migrants, both legal and illegal. Its perspective is that of international political economy (IPE). In the context of migration, this encompasses the realist tradition in political science in which migration outcomes are governed by states or by interest groups within them, (neo)liberal institutionalism with its emphasis on regulation of migration by international institutions, and the “globalization thesis” that envisages looser controls on mobility as an inevitable accompaniment of an ongoing weakening of state sovereignty and national ties. The first, theoretical section of the volume, although subtitled “Towards an International Political Economy of Migration,” offers a less than cogent account of this territory. Its chapters cover state regulation of migration, transnational migration and global governance, the requirements of an ethical mobility regime, human trafficking, and migration effects of urban transformations. The IPE approach (and a sub-category, critical IPE) seems to be essentially defined by the migration studies of political scientists. A second part, on the economic dimensions of migration, contains more focused essays on international labor migration, guestworker regimes, migration effects on welfare states, migrant remittances, and migration provisions in trade pacts. Finally, a third section consists of case studies of aspects of the political economy of migration in the European Union, the Middle East, North America, and Southeast Asia, with particular attention to regional integration. An outlier in this part is a paper on Cairo, depicted as a global city with a large migrant-swollen informal labor market entrenching a social hierarchy with varying degrees of citizenship. The editors and most of the contributors are from British and other European universities. Chapter bibliographies, index.

What explains the choice of corporate political strategy in environmental politics? Drawing on recent models of actor strategy formation in political economy, this article argues that basic material interests of firms are translated into strategies in the context of institutional environments. I advance a typological model that posits how distributional effects—positive versus negative—and perceived regulatory pressure—low versus high—interact in leading firms to adopt one of four ideal-type strategies: opposition, hedging, support, and non-participation. This article examines the model through the case of corporate strategies in the making of the European Union’s Emission Trading Scheme. The article contributes to theory-building on business strategy in environmental politics by offering a probabilistic explanatory model, and it flags hedging strategies as an increasingly prevalent form of business behavior.

The end of the Cold War witnessed a surge of regionalism, which triggered the proliferation of new research. While studies on the European Union (EU) used to dominate the field, developing distinctive concepts and theories, regionalism has gained prominence outside Europe. Students of area studies in particular felt that EU approaches had little to offer that could help them understand processes of regionalism in Africa or Asia. The so-called 'New Regionalism' literature has, therefore, taken a different approach that emphasizes the social construction of regions and the role of non-state actors other than pressure groups, as well as the importance of cultural and environmental aspects (Farrell et al. 2005; Hettne et al. 1999; Söderbaum and Shaw 2003). At the same time, international political economy (IPE) gave rise to another important body of research on regionalism, focusing on regional trade and investment patterns and the design of regional institutions to foster liberalization and settle disputes over market access. The main dependent variable of such IPE approaches is the emergence and effectiveness of preferential and free trade areas (PTA and FTA), whose number is sufficiently large to apply statistical methods to test various strands of (rational) institutionalist theories (inter alia Mansfield and Milner 1997; Mansfield and Reinhardt 2003; Milner 1988).KeywordsEuropean UnionRegional OrganizationGood GovernanceGovernance InstitutionNorth American Free Trade AgreementThese keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

The link between international conflict and economy linkage is one of the focal subjects in international political economy (IPE). The aim of this article is to scrutinise the impact of the economic factor on managing Indo-Pakistan conflict based on IPE approaches. So, the article organizes as follows: first, it is tried to provide a brief coherent theoretical framework concentrated on conflict-economy linkage; this contributes to idenifying two macro variables: bilateral cooperation and economy-oriented policy. Second, Indo-Pakistan cooperation is studied through two indices of bilateral trade and investment. Third, using available data, it is demonstrated that economy-oriented policy by the countries has deterred them from reciprocal hostile actions and led them to prudent conducts. The paper will be ended with a conclusion.

In the existing literature on international relations in the country, realism and the theoretical branches associated with this school enjoy high acceptance. Various factors have driven the country's elites towards a specific reading of realism. The author proceeds from the belief that realism encompasses a diverse set of different theories. The lack of complete knowledge of this set, the efforts and the inability to accurately understand the key concepts in this field, will lead to a superficial and inaccurate perception. The present study aims to address this deficiency with a new perspective and, if possible, provide an answer. With this description, the question that the present study attempts to answer is: What capacity does realism have to respond to today's new issues in the field of changes in the international system? In response to this question, it can be said that Robert Gilpin's reading of realism based on the cycle of hegemony (in international politics) alongside hegemonic stability (in international political economy) provides a suitable window for presenting a more or less narrative account of this issue (the transformation of the international political economy system). In this regard, the Solow economic model, which is used to strengthen, enrich, and attempt to quantify Gilpin's reading of realism, provides a framework for providing a better explanation of the transitions and changes in the system. The writing strategy of the previous paper is of the comparative type, and its research method is also of the basic, case-based, and static type. What has been examined in this study is the use of Robert Gilpin's theories in the fields of international politics and international political economy, which have been strengthened and enriched by Robert Solow's economic model to better explain the cycles and changes in the international political economy system.

Gramscian International Political Economy scholarship has predominantly focused on studying capital’s power to subsume labour under different hegemonic projects. Various autonomist Marxists have recently sought to ‘voice labour’ by proposing a disruption-oriented International Political Economy. However, this article argues that such an approach mirrors domination-oriented International Political Economy approaches by overemphasising labour’s disruptive potentiality and by paying little attention to the historical limitations that labour faces in its own empowerment. To escape from the unilateralism of these two mutually exclusive perspectives, Gramsci’s ‘Methodology of the Subaltern’ is reviewed in order to propose a Gramscian or strategic International Political Economy of Labour. Hence, this article shows that it is possible for International Political Economy scholars to study uneven capitalist development as the result of the agency of (dis)organised labour and thereby to better account for the emancipatory potentiality of working-class strategies in specific contexts.

Monism vs. Pluralism, the Global Financial Crisis, and the Methodological Struggle in the Field of International Political Economy

This paper aims to address the gap in previous studies by examining the role of Russia's realist approach in the Ukraine conflict and foreign relations, and how this impacts Germany's strategic choices. The paper adopts a qualitative research design, utilizing a literature review and case study analysis of the relationship between the two countries in the Ukraine conflict to explore the complexities of the Germany-Russia relationship. Specifically, the paper examines the dilemma of strategic choice of Germany in the Ukraine conflict where Germany's liberal and constructivist approaches could bring economic benefits to Germany, but the security concerns of EU and Germany in the face of Russian aggression face the challenges threatened by a realist approach of Russia. The findings of this paper suggest that the balance of power approach is relevant for the strategic choice of Germany, but in the long term, Germany needs to ensure its economic development to sustain its leadership position in EU as well as dealing with the challenges of Russia’s realist approach.

Scholars seek to articulate plausible explanations for the current world situation where the vast majority of countries are underdeveloped while a relatively small portion- the Western countries, are   rich. From the classical Marxist analysis emerged the neo-Marxists, encompassing the Third World scholars theorizing on the persistence of this division and development alternatives. Their central argument is ‘development of underdevelopment’ which forms the main strand of the dependency theory. However with the emergence of Brazil and China as global giants and the pervasive economic in-roads to Africa, a shift on Africa’s dependency on the global north seems inevitable. Is a “new dependency” emerging or is Africa developing and catching up to rise beyond a new dependency? This paper seeks to engage in the ongoing perennial debate on Africa’s dependency. It presents a critique of the dependency theory and argues that an inevitable economic growth of China will not only upturn the regional presence of America in Africa but will create a “new” relationship through Chinese soft technology-the new media and globalization. However the crux of the argument is whether this will in turn develop Africa or foster a new dependency within the global South. To interrogate these assumptions, this paper adopts international political economy (IPE) approach as a methodology to examine China/Africa relationship using post colonial tools of analysis.     Key words: Dependency, development, globalization, underdevelopment, modernization, poverty, Africa.

Mainstream International Political Economy (IPE) and Historical Sociology share a number of concerns. This has not, however, resulted in a significant body of historical IPE literature. It is argued that Historical Sociology poses two challenges for IPE, and that these must be accommodated before the field can become historically sensitive. The first concerns the ontology of historical IPE. Whereas mainstream IPE generally recognizes that states are not the only `units' in the international system, the challenge of Historical Sociology revolves around whether there are any relevant differentiations to be made in the concepts of `state' and `international system'. The second challenge concerns the question of continuity and change, an issue that has not been the object of extensive conceptual analysis in mainstream IPE. While this article does not offer any specific way of historicizing mainstream IPE, it does suggest a few guidelines for such an enterprise.

This chapter discusses some literature in International Political Economy and International Relations in order to compare and contrast orthodox and critical perspectives on knowledge, power and world order. Using Gramsci’s distinction between historical materialism and historical economism it attempts to highlight and critique a widespread tendency to use transhistorical theorizations based upon sets of a priori categories that appear to take on an ontological autonomy: a characteristic associated with American neo-realism and mechanical, economistic forms of Marxism.

Environmental issues and questions of global change are now firmly established on the international political agenda. This book provides a wide-ranging survey of the current treatment of environmental issues in international relations. This book begins by looking at the relevance of the different theoretical approaches current in international relations to the study of the environment. It analyzses a wide range of approaches from the debate between neo-realism and liberal institutionalism to the significant connections between gender and global environmental change. The book goes on to consider a range of key international processes, discussing the monitoring and implementation of environmental agreements, the place of ideology in negotiations and the role of international organisations.

This paper analyzes the effects of changes in relative commodity prices on the distribution of income among factors of production in the context of two models of a simple, two-good economy. In the first model capital is treated as a specific factor in each industry, with labor mobile between industries. The assumption of specificity determines the direction of factor income changes, with magnitudes depending on substitutability between factors and on intensities of factor use within the two industries. In the second model, capital is viewed as a quasi-fixed factor. For the short run, this model is identical to the model first considered. For the long run, this model is identical to the Stolper-Samuelson model in which the direction and magnitude of factor income changes depend solely on relative factor intensities. The difference between the short-run and long-run determinants of changes in factor incomes gives rise to a conflict between factor owners' short-run and long-run interests.

‘Anarchy is one of the most vague and ambiguous words in language.’ George Coreewall Lewis, 1832.In much current theorizing, anarchy has once again been declared to be the fundamental assumption about international politics. Over the last decade, numerous scholars, especially those in the neo-realist tradition, have posited anarchy as the single most important characteristic underlying international relations. This article explores implications of such an assumption. In doing so, it reopens older debates about the nature of international politics. First, I examine various concepts of ‘anarchy’ employed in the international relations literature. Second, I probe the sharp dichotomy between domestic and international politics that is associated with this assumption. As others have, I question the validity and utility of such a dichotomy. Finally, this article suggests that a more fruitful way to understand the international system is one that combines anarchy and interdependence.